"...first ascertain exactly the position of the various capitalists, then control them, influence them by restricting or enlarging, facilitating or hindering their credits, and finally they can entirely determine their fate."
by:
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
[Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov] (1870 - 1924), First Leader of the Soviet Union
Rating:
Categories:
 
Bookmark and Share  
Reader comments about this quote:
Problem is, once those in power have this mentality and start the ball rolling, the majority populace is completely unsuspecting until it's too late. 5 stars for accuracy.
 -- Logan, Memphis, TN     
  •  
    Thumbs down for what its done to this nation, 5 stars for accuracy. Isn't that part of B.O's platform?
     -- Mike, Norwalk     
  •  
    Sounds like a plan to me.Now lets get busy prosecuting those following the plan.
     -- Me Again     
  •  
    Are we sure this is not attributed to Sarah Palin when she socialized the Alsakan Oil industry for the benfit of the people to the extent that every man, woman, and child gets $1200 dollars a year from the oil companies. We influence, control, and facilitate "capitalists" all of the time. The "state" builds industrial parks, grants special exemptions and inticements and inducements for "capitalists" to come to their towns, and then they control them with pollutions standards, rules and regulations etc. As Bush bragged recently, "democratic capitalism is the best way".
     -- Waffler, Smith, Arkansas     
  •  
    There is no such thing as "democratic capitalism" -- by definition, this is Socialism. Waffler has a good point, even the conservative "capitalists" in government today are socialists. We haven't lived under true capitalism for a very, very, very long time.
     -- Logan, Memphis, TN     
  •  
    Nationalist Socialist doctrines come from the central bankers and the myriad of offices and agencies that then 'manage' the flow of wealth into their pockets. Both the Demos and the GOP merely further different aspects of the same Fascist agenda -- both parties are completely beholden to the Fed and are reminded from time to time of the price for going against it. When counterfeiting is legalized, the counterfeitors will simply buy up the world. That is what central banks around the world have done, and they all roll up to a cabal of ruling families that have been doing this for centuries. If we ever get a President who will stand up to this cartel, we may be spared a bloody revolution.
     -- E Archer, NYC     
  •  
    I had never heard the term "democratic capitalism" untile Bush uttered it the other day. I think he meant capitalism which is a form of economic organization and democracy which is a form of political organization existing side by side in the same population.
     -- Waffler, Smith, Arkansas     
  •  
    Thank God we have never lived under true capitalism. England in the 1850's were the closest to it and they learned to hate it.
     -- Waffler, Smith, Arkansas     
  •  
    Well, I would leave it up to Bush to make an ignorant illogical fallacy and paradox. How can you have an capitalist economic organization in democracy? Think about it -- if your only stipulation for the legitimacy of government/society is that the majority rules every time without exception (no other checks or balances -- let's say -- like Natural Law), then you have to wonder why the people/workers of every corporation in the United States doesn't instantly take over corporations. If this is the only stipulation for society to follow, you have to wonder why the people aren't taking things over. You have to then admit that the people are either stupid, apathetic, or lazy. How can capitalism exist if the workers are the final authority in calling the shots for the company? We have stock holders, sure -- but this is not the same thing; stock holders buy into the system and don't have any say so simply by virtue of being in the majority of workers for the company. Do we say that the corporate executives are only there because their employees allow them to be? That every executive in the US could be ousted by his employees merely by putting the matter to a vote? Is this America? Is this how we do things RIGHT NOW? HELL NO! There ARE countries and leaders that have sought to do this very thing: Make corporate leadership "electable" by the workers. in essence, you take away all corporate ownership and place the entire function of private ownership into the hands of the employees/people. You know what this idea is called? IT'S SOCIALISM!!!! You cannot have "democratic capitalism", because capitalism DIES in such a scenario! Good Hell!! You can't have "democracy" and "capitalism" existent in the same sphere period! If you truly want Democracy, then you are a proud supporter and lover of socialism, a hater of capitalism, and a despiser of the Constitution (a document I'm sure Waffler still has yet to read).
     -- Logan, Memphis, TN     
  •  
    Capitalism is not sacred. It is only good to the extent that it works. Economics is not sacred. Feudalism worked fot the nobility, capitalism is much more democratic. Under feudalism you were somebody if your daddy was somebody, under capitalism you are somebody if your daddy has money. There is no absolute right or worig with these systems. It depends on ones value system. If you think justice is equal opportunity of the new born, then inheritance is to a more or lesser degree unjust. Marx prefered capitalism over feudalism because of its democratic nature. Anyone can be somebody, thus democratic capitalims,. I think for once Bush is right and as usual Mr. Logan is wrong.
     -- Waffler, Smith, Arkansas     
  •  
    Waffler, really funny. All that discourse and never once using a definition that actually came close to describing 'capitalism'. You may have looked up 'capitalis' - an Old English legal term depicting a captain, lord, or principal over property and/or an issue of value - often in a family setting; capitalis had more to do with property rights than investments or economics. Most briefly, 'capitalism' is an individual investing in a free market, using profits to reinvest. Here, a free market would indicate an uninhibited lawful endeavor (a manufacturing facility that pollutes a neighbor - known or, beyond established legal norms, is not lawful) If a government invests (majority or otherwise), no matter the method, that is socialism, not capitalism. The guaranteed setting in which an individual can succeed or fail on his own merits, is sacred. That is a free market, without it, there is no capitalism. Bail outs, subordinations, special tax treatments, etc. would all define non capitalistic forms of economics. Marx's entire premise was anti Christianity, capitalism, freedom, etc.
     -- Mike, Norwalk     
  •  
    Marx preferred that the people via the state own all of the business or capital. Democratic capitalism the people own the businesses or capital via the stock company concept. In the first model you have the crooked state commissars, in the second you have the crooked Wall Street guys, either way the people are screwed. I submit that neither system is sacred but is useful only to the exent that they work. Do you not know that David stole the sacred bread that was dedicated to the sacred service of God in the Temple in order to feed his men. Jesus defended David, saying that the lesson is that "life is sacred". Thus economic systems should support life and enhance life. A system that breaks and wears down one man fro the benefit of another is probably not so good. We should search for that optimal system that enchances and supports the worker and the recipient of his efforts. The manipulation of markets and men for greed is not really the way to go.
     -- Waffler, Smith, Arkansas     
  •  
    I don't know much about Marx but that he analysed the economic history of some men and saw that capitalism was better and more demorcratic than feudalism.
     -- Waffler, Smith, Arkansas     
  •  
    If you liked Secretary Lenin, you'll LOVE President Obama!!
     -- Tim Blosser, Enola, PA     
  •  
    Moses, smell the roses, Waffler. Your responses are completely nonsensical. Marx was NEVER a proponent of capitalism, sheesh. For a person that says he doesn't know much about Marx, I would suggest then NOT making stuff up. I am surprised you say you don't know much about Marx because your posts certainly have proposed every plank in the Communist Manifesto -- you have praised a central bank, condemned inheritance because all should be obligated to work, believe we all are "renters" on this planet negating property rights, praised the IRS and progressive income tax, praised free and compulsory government schooling, praised the authority of the State above the individual, recommended state control and regulation of industry... For a person who knows little about Marx, you sure are brilliant about his philosophy that has murdered hundreds of millions of people to achieve.
     -- E Archer, NYC     
  •  
    Again Waffler is not hiding his true colors of being paid to troll this site, by wasting everyones time with meaningless comments.
     -- TrollHunter, Sometown, USA     
  •  
     
    Rate this quote!
    How many stars?
    0
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5

     
    What do YOU think?
    Your name:
    Your town:
        CLICK JUST ONCE!

    More Quotations
    Get a Quote-A-Day! Free!
    Liberty Quotes sent to your mail box.
    RSS Subscribe
    Quotes & Quotations - Send This Quote to a Friend

    © 1998-2018 Liberty-Tree.ca